Why Catholics Must Reject the 'Lesser of Two Evils'

[Stone]

Why Catholics Must Reject the 'Lesser of Two Evils'

COMBAT⚔ERROR, THE☩TRUMPET | October 17, 2024


To thoroughly reject the notion of voting for the "lesser of two evils," we turn to Traditional Catholic sources that emphasize moral absolutes and uncompromising adherence to Church teachings on cooperation with evil:


1. St. Thomas Aquinas on Cooperation with Evil

St. Thomas Aquinas provides a foundational argument against choosing any evil, regardless of its degree. He teaches, “No one is permitted to commit sin, even for the sake of avoiding a greater sin or obtaining a greater good” (Summa Theologiae, II-II, Q. 78, Art. 1). The principle here is clear: choosing the lesser of two evils still involves committing an evil act, which is never permissible. Aquinas’s teaching underscores that we cannot engage in moral wrongdoing, even with the intent of achieving a supposedly greater good.


2. Pope Pius XI in Casti Connubii

Pope Pius XI, in his encyclical Casti Connubii (1930), condemns abortion as a grave evil that Catholics must oppose without compromise. He states: “In this matter, Catholics cannot allow themselves to be guided by mere expediency but must obey the dictates of the moral law.” This directive is not limited to abortion; it applies to all actions that conflict with the moral law. Voting for a candidate who supports any form of abortion, even if perceived as the lesser evil, amounts to indirect cooperation with evil, which Catholics must reject.


3. Pope Pius XII on the Dangers of Moral Compromise

Pope Pius XII emphasized the Church’s duty to uphold moral truth without compromise. In his Allocution to the Congress of the Italian Catholic Jurists (December 6, 1953), he proclaimed, “The good end does not make right an action which is in itself wrong.” This means that even if a candidate’s election might lead to certain good outcomes, voting for them still involves endorsing moral wrongs. This statement directly refutes the idea of supporting a lesser evil, as it reveals how this approach leads Catholics to justify morally unacceptable actions for perceived benefits.


4.Pope St. Gregory the Great on Leadership and Moral Integrity

Pope St. Gregory the Great advised against selecting leaders who fail to uphold moral principles. In his Pastoral Rule, he emphasizes, “It is better that scandals arise than the truth be suppressed.” Here, he underscores the need for Catholics to uphold moral truth at all costs. Supporting a candidate who promotes or tolerates grave evils like abortion constitutes a form of moral surrender. St. Gregory’s words call Catholics to choose leaders who are fully aligned with Catholic values, not merely lesser evils.


5. Catholic Moral Theology on the Misapplication of the Double Effect Principle

The principle of double effect does not justify voting for a morally compromised candidate. According to Traditional Catholic moral theology, this principle applies only when the bad effect is not directly willed, and there is no other way to achieve a necessary good. In the case of voting, however, Catholics knowingly endorse a candidate with morally flawed positions, which constitutes direct cooperation with evil. Therefore, the double effect principle does not provide cover for voting for the lesser evil.


Traditional Catholic teaching, as seen in the works of St. Thomas Aquinas, Pope Pius XI, Pope Pius XII, and Archbishop Lefebvre, is unequivocal: Catholics cannot choose any evil, even if it is perceived as lesser. Supporting a candidate who endorses intrinsic evils like abortion is incompatible with Catholic principles. Instead, Catholics must seek alternatives that align with moral absolutes and uphold the Faith without compromise. The call is to reject any form of political manipulation that lures Catholics into accepting moral compromises and to remain steadfast in defending the Church’s teachings on non-negotiable issues.


-The ☩ Trumpet